Search for: "State v. May"
Results 4521 - 4540
of 120,203
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Jan 2009, 4:15 am
In such respect the legislature shall define the powers and duties and may also assign to him or her: . . . supervision of the accounts of any political subdivision of the state . . . [read post]
22 Apr 2009, 8:12 am
In Lava Records v. [read post]
19 Mar 2010, 10:31 am
The second reason is not as obvious: prevailing on an action to enforce a non-compete where blue-penciling is ordered may limit the right to recover attorneys' fees by contract.As the Court of Appeals of Missouri held last week in Paradise v. [read post]
27 Dec 2016, 4:11 am
This post is not a summary of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Jindal Stainless Ltd v State of Haryana, Civil Appeal No. 3453/2002 (2016) (“the Entry Tax case”). [read post]
12 Nov 2016, 3:18 pm
This post is not a summary of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Jindal Stainless Ltd v State of Haryana, Civil Appeal No. 3453/2002 (2016) (“the Entry Tax case”). [read post]
22 Feb 2019, 10:17 am
State of Illinois. [read post]
20 Dec 2022, 6:30 am
” Bush v. [read post]
24 May 2024, 2:12 pm
Either new strategies will have to be developed; otherwise it may be harder for States to resist the temptation of human shield strategies may be irresistible. [read post]
26 Apr 2013, 7:17 am
See Abraham v. [read post]
25 May 2014, 7:10 am
North Carolina The United States Supreme Court is also considering the case of Brewington v. [read post]
14 Jul 2017, 2:31 pm
On May 30, 2017, the Supreme Court decided Impression Products, Inc. v. [read post]
1 Dec 2019, 1:47 pm
A leading case is Callaghan v. [read post]
6 Jun 2011, 9:18 am
Enovsys LLC v. [read post]
2 Dec 2022, 10:11 pm
I have now had a chance to review the transcript in United States v. [read post]
17 Mar 2017, 3:28 pm
United States (2005) 546 U.S. 12, 17–18; see also Bowles v. [read post]
2 Jul 2019, 4:09 pm
“Likely” in this context normally means “more likely than not”, though a lesser prospect of success may suffice where the Court needs a short time to consider evidence/argument, or where the adverse consequences of publication might be extremely serious: Cream Holdings Ltd v Banerjee [2005] 1 AC 253 [16]-[23] (Lord Nicholls); ABC v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 2329 [2019] EMLR 5 [16]. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 5:10 am
Although disparate impact may be relevant evidence of discrimination such evidence is insufficient to prove a constitutional violation even where the Fourteenth Amendment subjects state action to strict scrutiny, the plurality explained, citing Board of Trustees of Univ of Ala v Garrett. [read post]
20 May 2024, 5:57 am
Guarascio v. [read post]
3 May 2018, 6:37 am
Greenpeace v. [read post]
29 Jun 2010, 11:19 am
Writing in anticipation of the Supreme Court’s decision in McDonald v. [read post]
